Poetry, Fiction, Indian Writing in English, Comparative Literature, Criticism; you'll find most of it here simplified

Monday, 20 August 2012

The Three Voices of Poetry – An essay by T.S. Eliot – Overview

Eliot through this essay brings to the surface the fact that
each poem or work o art has a distinctive voice. The voice differs with the
situation as if one is writing for the stage the approach would certainly be
different from verse writing that is to be read or recited. Thus, for a work to
be really successful, the voice must be in tune to what is being said and vice
versa.

The first voice is
that of the poet talking aloud to himself without thinking of addressing an
audience. The second voice is best seen in a dramatic monologue where a poet
addresses himself to an audience. The third voice is an indirect manifestation
of the second one. Here, the poet uses an imaginary character as a mouth piece,
and this character addresses another imaginary character thus, letting the poet
have the liberty to speak his mind seen most commonly in the poetic drama.
However, the employment of these voices is much more difficult than can be seen
on the surface.

The Voices

When we look at the difference between the first and second
voices we find the problem o poetic communication to be posed. And when we look
at all three voices together we see that there is a difference in the dramatic,
quasi-dramatic and non-dramatic verse.

From Eliot’s viewpoint, it is an illusion to think that
there is such a voice as that of a poet talking to one person even though there
are poems addressed to particular people (Epistles). There is a certain amount
of overhearing expected, even though a love poem may be addressed to one person
it is meant to be overheard by others for Eliot finds prose more suited to
private discourse with one’s beloved.

Eliot on taking up the dramatic pen found that he used the
second voice of the poet addressing the audience rather than addressal through
imaginary characters (third voice). In fact, even the second voice is hard to
master as many a time it is the character bending to the writer’s view than
showing any real character for itself. When dealing with a group or choir a
writer must employ verse that differs from that used for a single speaker.
Thus, it is when the writer practically sits done to write that the voices make
themselves most clear.

“Its (the chorus’)
members were speaking for me, not uttering words that really represented any
supposed character of their own.”

To write in the second voice, the writer must first identify
himself with the characters instead of the other way around to make it
successful. In the case of the third voice, the writer has to identify himself
with the characters but also find the words to make the communication taking
place between these fictionous characters seem plausible.When writing non-dramatic verse one writes in
the terms of one’s own voice (the way the writer would speak) and while writing
tests it to see how it sounds when you read it to yourself. The reason it is so
is because it is the writer speaking in his natural voice and as for
communicating ideas to a reader; that is not the main aim. The writer isn’t
interested in getting the reader to understand what is being said; it is the
act of expression that is of greater importance. Thus, when speaking for an
imaginary character the thrust changes for it is not yourself merely but the
character that you also must consider.

Complexity of the third voice – poetic drama

When dealing with a verse play, a writer has a varied range
of characters to gift speech to and these characters vary in temperament,
background, education and intelligence. Due to this, the writer cannot single
out one character for identification with and bestow all the important line or
poetry to it. Take for example Jane Austen’s writing. All her characters have
some say or the other and move the plot onward, none of them pose as mere
furniture. A character cannot be a mere mouthpiece as it will bring to notice
the artificial aspect of the play and drama is a suspension of belief. You
believe what you see on stage to be true temporarily so as to engage with it
but for this the words assigned to the character should sound plausible, bring
out the right degree of emotion and move the action forward.

“The poet writing for
the theatre may, as I have found, make two mistakes: that of assigning to a
personage lines of poetry not suitable to be spoken by that personage, and that
of assigning lines which, however suitable to the personage, and that of
assigning lines which, however suitable to the personage, yet fail to forward
the action of the play.”

Eliot further elaborates that to make a character actually
seem alive is not possible by just words alone but by certain sympathy excited
in the writer’s breast fro that character. A novelist has more scope to
manipulate a character but a dramatist is hard put due to the lack of time and
space provided. He also poses the question whether it is even possible to
therefore, make a villain seem real as weakness will have to blend with either
heroic virtue or villainy for a truly evil character to stay real. Therefore,
the image of Iago is far more frightening than that of Richard the Third.

The creation of a character leads to a give-and-take between
the author and the character. Besides the other traits of the character, the
author may bestow some of his own traits to it and also may to a certain extent
be influenced by the character. Thus, author is compelled to sysmpathise with
characters that may be at a contrast to each other while allocating poetry as
widely to each character as possible and also diving this poetry so that there
is variation in style suited to the character that speaks it. The second voice – dramatic monologue

It can be termed non-dramatic poetry with an element of the
dramatic in it and is on contrasting terms from poetic drama where the author
must have divide loyalties. As Eliot very succinctly puts it, there is no check
on the poet while writing a dramatic monologue as he deals with one particular
character that needs only to identify with him or vice versa. There is no
second character that has to be replied to or set at variance at.

“What we normally
hear, in fact, in the dramatic monologue, is the voice of the poet, who has put
on the costume and make-up either of some historical character, or one out of
fiction. His personage must be identified to us – as an individual, or at least
as a type – before he begins to speak.”

Frequently we find that the poet adopts a history character
or a known character of fiction for this role. Erza Pound, Browning’s greatest
disciple adopted the term ‘persona’ to indicate several historical characters
through whom he spoke. Eliot also brings out the fact that a dramatic monologue
cannot create a character as action constitutes one and it can only be created
by communication between imaginary people.

If the poet only speaks in his own voice a character cannot
be brought to life as it is only mimicry taking place. And the point of mimicry
lies in recognition of the person being mimicked and in the incompleteness of
the picture. If we are deceived into thinking the speaker and person mimicked
are same then it is impersonation. When we read or listen to Shakespeare’s
plays we aren’t listening to his voice but that of his characters and when we
read Browning’s dramatic monologues, we are listening to no other voice expect
Browning’s.

Thus, the dramatic monologue is the second voice, i.e. the
voice of the poet speaking to an audience. The fact that the poet dons a mask
is in itself self obvious as no one would go to such lengths merely to talk to
himself. The second voice in poetry is the one heard most often and is clearer
than the rest. All poetry has some conscious social purpose, either to preach,
instruct, and tell a story, moral and the like. In the epic this is the most
employed voice though in Homer you do hear a dramatic voice from time to time.
There are points when the hero tells his tale directly.

The first voice of poetry – the poet addressing himself
alone

Meditative verse is a form of poetry where the poet writes
not to be listened to but to purge himself of the emotions he is unable to
carry. The poet is concerned only with using the best words possible to convey
what he feels. “He does not know what he
has to say until he has said it; and in the effort to say it he is not
concerned with making other people understand anything.”... “He is oppressed by
a burden which he must bring to birth in order to obtain relief.”

According to Eliot a “psychic material” - call it
inspiration, the muses or what you may, causes the poet to feel the urge to
convey something through his pen. This is the germ of creation that causes the
poem to be written. Here, poetry has no fixed shape and it is only after it is
written that the final structure is seen which is not the case in works of the
second and third voice where already some preconceived form is adhered to even
though modifications in the process of its creation may creep in.Union of voices – a summation

Even though a poet may have written the poem without keeping
an audience in mind, he would be curious to see how people react to his
thoughts and on discussions might add to or modify his work changing the voice
of the poem slightly. “If the author never spoke to himself, the result would
not be poetry, though it might be magnificent rhetoric; and part of our
enjoyment of great poetry is the enjoyment of overhearing words which are not
addressed to us. Even in dramatic verse there are times when the author and
character both speak in unison saying something that though appropriate to the
character can be something that the author can say from his context too even
though the words may not hold the same symbolic value for both.